LAUSR

Background: Although high power, shorter duration (HPSD) ablation and low power, longer duration (LPLD) ablation strategies for atrial fibrillation (AF) are frequently advocated to enhance safety and efficacy, there exists a need for comparative data from large populations. We performed a meta-analysis to compare arrhythmia-free survival, procedure time and complications rates between the two strategies. Methods: We searched the databases of MEDLINE and EMBASE from inception to April 2020. Included studies were case-control studies, cohort studies, or randomized controlled trials that compared patients undergoing HPSD and LPLD strategies for AF ablation and reported either of the following outcomes: freedom from atrial tachyarrhythmia (AT) including AF and atrial flutter, procedure time, or periprocedural complications. Data from each study were combined using the random-effects model to calculate odds ratio (OR) and weighted mean difference (WMD) with 95% confidence interval (CI). Results: Ten studies from 2006 to 2020 involving 2,189 patients were included (1,350 patients underwent HPSD strategy and 839 patients underwent LPLD strategy). Both HPSD and LPLD strategies resulted in a similar freedom from AT at 12-month follow-up (OR=1.36, 95% CI:0.91-2.04, p=0.13, Figure 1A). HPSD strategy did result in a significant reduction in total procedure time (WMD=47.34, 95% CI:29.47-65.21, p<0.001, Figure 1B) compared to LPSD. HPSD wasn’t associated with reduction in esophageal ulcer/arterioesophageal fistula (OR=0.35, 95%CI=0.12-1.06, p=0.06) or pericardial effusion/cardiac tamponade (OR=0.96, 95%CI: 0.24-3.79, p=0.95) Conclusions: In this large meta-analysis both LPLD and HPSD are equally effective and safe. Although HPSD is often advocated to reduce esophageal injury, risk was similar between approaches. However, HPSD strategy significantly lowers procedure times.